Prall v. Imlay

• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
• Citation: Prall v. Imlay, 270 F. 688 (D.C. Cir. 1921)
• Decision Date: 07 February 1921
• Docket Number: 3420.
• Parties: PRALL et al. v. IMLAY et al.

270 F. 688

PRALL et al. v. IMLAY et al.

No. 3420.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia.

February 7, 1921

Submitted January 5, 1921.

Appeal from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

Henry E. Davis and Alvin L. Newmeyer, both of Washington, D.C., for appellants.

Charles V. Imlay, George W. Offutt, Jr., and J. W. McNeill, all of Washington, D.C., for appellees.

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

A bill in equity was filed March 31, 1904, in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia by Elizabeth C. Prall, as complainant, against Jennie M. Prall, Annie M. Prall, Emma C Knorr, Augustus Ernest Knorr, Gladys Ernestine Knorr, William E. Prall, Sr., Julia L. Prall, and Adolph A. Hoehling, Jr. to procure partition by sale of certain real estate described therein. It is averred in the bill, among other things, that William E. Prall, Sr., on May 17, 1872, conveyed the premises in question to his children, Jennie M., Annie M., Emma C and William E. Prall, Jr., 'for and during their natural life as tenants in common, with remainders to the children of said parties of the second part, their heirs and assigns as tenants in common in fee simple.'

It appears that service of process was had upon the infant defendant. Gladys E. Knorr, and another defendant, Annie M Prall, was appointed her guardian ad litem, and, as such, formally answered the bill. Certain orders were made, which need not be considered, since no sale was made. On June 13, 1911, complainant filed an amended bill setting up additional rights claimed to have accrued to her by reason of the death of her husband, William E. Prall, Jr. She prayed that a decree entered under the original bill on January 9, 1906, 'be set aside and a new substitute and proper judicial partition decree by sale be passed declaring and fixing the rights, titles and interests, present and future, of your petitioner and the defendants herein according to the provisions by the fixed terms of the aforesaid deed herein'; that new trustees be appointed, the property sold, and the proceeds divided, and that a rule issue upon the several defendants and the then existing trustees to show cause why the prayers of the petition should not be granted.

On November 13, 1911, a decree was entered setting aside the decree of January 9, 1906, determining the interests of the respective parties in the property, ordering a sale thereof and appointing the National Savings & Trust Company trustee. From this decree an appeal was taken to this court (Prall v. Prall, 39 App.D.C. 100), wherein the decree of the court below, in respect of fixing the interests of the claimants under the deed, was modified and affirmed. Thereafter, on May 22, 1914, a decree was entered in the court below in conformity with the mandate of this court directing a sale of the property.

No sale was made, and, on November 25, 1919, Gladys E. Lavagnino, the former infant Gladys E. Knorr, filed a petition 'to establish interest and vacate order of sale,' in which she reviewed the proceedings had since the filing of the original bill in 1904. She avers that neither she nor her guardian ad litem were served with process or notice under the amended bill of 1911, or with notice of the various proceedings thereunder; that she became of age January 15 1916; that Elizabeth C. Prall, the original complainant, has been adjudged insane, and appellee Imlay appointed a committee of her estate, and that no sale of the property can be made at this time for its fair and reasonable value. She prays, in effect, that all...